HUMANITARIAN AID ACCESS WITHIN
DARFUR
“It is strange to see that there is still the notion in the world that nothing is happening and we’re completely blocked from
accessing Darfur. We are reaching some 800,000 people at the moment with some sort of assistance and food.”
Jan Egeland, UN Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs, July 2004 [1]
“Most of the underserved areas remain rebel-held, many of which have not been accessible to UN agencies because of a series of
security incidents and a delay in obtaining SLA agreement and understanding of humanitarian rules and principles laid out in
agreements.”
United Nations Report, December 2004 [2]
There has been considerable sensationalism with regard to humanitarian aid access to Darfur. There have been
attempts to claim that the government has been systematically denying humanitarian access to Darfur and Darfur’s
war-affected communities. The reality is that ensuring humanitarian access to the war-affected communities while a
political solution is sought is the single most important task facing both the Sudanese government and the
international community. At the same time it is clear that a continuing humanitarian crisis, especially one in which
aid workers cannot gain access to war-affected communities, is in the best interests of the rebel movements. It is now
equally obvious that the rebel movement have not only been seeking to deny humanitarian access to governmentcontrolled
areas by attacks on aid workers – attacks which in turn result in aid agencies suspending activities in parts
of Darfur – and by attacks on humanitarian aid convoys: they have also denying the international community access
to rebel-controlled areas, thereby severely affected the very people they claim to protect. All of this in an attempt to
further ratchet up international pressure on the Sudanese government.
Any study of the Darfur crisis must examine the aid issue in some depth. Humanitarian access to displaced
communities in Darfur is essential in addressing the crisis. The international community must be aware of the extent
to which emergency relief and food aid in such circumstances can and has been manipulated.
The Government of Sudan would appear to have acted responsibly with regard to humanitarian access to Darfur. The
facts speak for themselves. In September 2003, the Government of Sudan and the SLA signed an agreement allowing “free and unimpeded” humanitarian access within Darfur. [3] In less than 12 months the Sudanese government had
agreed and facilitated an increase in aid workers present in Darfur, from two foreigners and a few dozen nationals in
September 2003, to just under 6,000 aid workers – over 700 of them expatriates – by August 2004. [4] By the end of
2004, there were 8,500 aid workers in Darfur. The signing of the April 2004 ceasefire made it safer and thus much
consequently easier for aid agencies to operate in Darfur. The UN 2004 end of year humanitarian action report stated
that “much credit has to be given to the [government] Humanitarian Affairs Ministry whose officials worked
tirelessly to enforce the provision of the Joint Communique of 3 July [guaranteeing access].” [5]
On 6 July 2004, the government issued 15 decrees which included measures to enhance security in Darfur; the
establishment of police stations in displaced people camps; to facilitate the ceasefire commission and African Union
monitoring force; to streamline the granting of visas for aid workers in Darfur; the exemption of all humanitarian aid
imports from any restrictions, customs tariffs or personal fees; the repeal of measures regarding specifications on
the humanitarian aid imports into Darfur; to facilitate freedom of movement for those working in the humanitarian
aid organizations in Darfur; to facilitate the flow of humanitarian aid to displaced people in Darfur; to exempt
humanitarian aid from the health and medical regulations in Darfur; the exemption of agricultural inputs, fodders,
and seeds in Darfur from any restrictions, customs tariffs or personal fees; exemption from import restrictions of
humanitarian aid imports into Darfur; to activate the measures regarding the governments of the Darfur states to
guarantee the flow of humanitarian aid and humanitarian aid imports into Darfur and to encourage the return of the
displaced to their villages; and to facilitate the work of the fact-finding commission in regard to the allegations of
human rights violations committed by armed groups in Darfur. As of October 2004, there were 155 locations assisting with internally displaced people in the three Darfur states,
and the World Food Programme is present in 136 of these centres. [6] There are now dozens of international and
national non-governmental organisations working in Darfur. [7] Speaking in June 2004, the outgoing UN Humanitarian
Coordinator for Sudan, Mr Kevin Kennedy, confirmed that visas were generally being granted within 48 hours – as
promised by the Government of Sudan – and that “people are experiencing very few visa difficulties”. [8] That there
have been propagandistic attempts to claim that the government was deliberately blocking access to Darfur by aid
workers is apparent. The United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs, Mr Jan Egeland,
speaking in July 2004, commented on some of these claims. He said: “It is strange to see that there is still the notion
in the world that nothing is happening and we’re completely blocked from accessing Darfur. We are reaching some
800,000 people at the moment with some sort of assistance and food.” [9] By September 2004, the World Food
Programme was feeding some 940,000 conflict-affected people in Darfur. [10] The presence of several thousand aid
workers in Darfur provides clear evidence of the Khartoum government’s commitment to the provision of food and
medical relief to Darfur’s war-affected communities.
The international community must be aware of the extent to which humanitarian issues can be manipulated for
political effect. [11] For rebels a humanitarian crisis is a no-lose situation. A humanitarian crisis always reflects badly
on the government in the country affected. And a humanitarian crisis is something which can be created and
deepened. One of the goals of most insurgencies is to internationalise the conflict to which they are a party. One of
the easiest means of doing so is to provoke a humanitarian crisis. This is precisely what the Darfur rebels succeeded
in doing. Merely starting the war in Darfur initiated a humanitarian crisis in western Sudan. The escalation of the
conflict and the government’s response to it led to a deepening crisis and considerable displacement of populations –
a feature of most wars. The rebels, however, have deliberately sought to heighten the humanitarian crisis they created
by starting the war by additionally seeking to escalate food insecurity knowing full well that this would be the focus
of immediate international attention. As early as July 2003, for example, the UN news service reported on rebel
attempts to disrupt food security in the affected areas: “SLA rebels regularly attacked and looted villages taking food
and sometimes killing people…The attacks present a real threat to people’s food security and livelihoods, by
preventing them from planting and accessing markets to buy food.” [12]
The provision of humanitarian relief such as food aid and medical supplies has historically also been a bonus to rebel
movements. Firstly, international access impinges upon the national sovereignty of the country concerned, a net
propaganda victory for anti-government forces as it brings with it international attention. Secondly, international
agencies provide food and emergency supplies which help to sustain communities within rebel-controlled areas and
can often be diverted by rebel forces. It was widely acknowledged, for example, that vast amounts of food aid were
diverted during the war in southern Sudan. In July 1998, in one instance, the Roman Catholic Bishop of the
starvation-affected diocese of Rumbek, Monsignor Caesar Mazzolari, stated that the SPLA were stealing 65 percent
of the food aid going into rebel-held areas of southern Sudan. Agence France Presse also reported that: “Much of the
relief food going to more than a million famine victims in rebel-held areas of southern Sudan is ending up in the hands of the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA), relief workers said.” [13] It is also clear that rebel forces in
Darfur are also directly misappropriating food aid and equipment stolen from relief agencies. This is a point made by
humanitarian aid expert, Professor Sarah Kenyon Lischer. Interviewed in January 2005, she noted that: “Recently,
the World Food Program has had over a dozen of its trucks hijacked. And the aid that was on those trucks has been
stolen. The trucks reportedly have been repainted and used for military purposes by the rebels. And so that’s just a
very obvious way that aid can be used for war.” [14] This had happened was confirmed by the United Nations: “The
United Nations said it was also concerned about reports that Darfur-based rebel forces have stolen 13 commercial all
terrain trucks leased to WFP and loaded with food in the last two weeks. These thefts are in addition to multiple
losses of commercial and aid agency vehicles to armed groups in recent months, [the UN said]. More alarming are
reports that the rebel group that stole them may now be using some of these trucks for military purposes, it said.” [15]
The UN Sudan Envoy Jan Pronk stated: “Such misuses of humanitarian assets should cease immediately. All trucks
and other equipment taken by armed groups from humanitarian organizations should be returned without delay so
that relief operations are not hindered further.” [16]
The rebels have, from the earliest days of the insurgency, sought to escalate humanitarian access difficulties by
deliberately targeting aid workers. They murdered nine World Food Programme truck drivers, and wounded 14
others, in an attack on a relief convoy in October 2003. [17] All this followed a set pattern by rebels in other parts of
Sudan, tactics which have previously succeeded in creating a humanitarian crisis in southern Sudan. The veteran
American journalist Robert Kaplan noted, for example: “On June 1, 1986, twelve Kenyan truck drivers bringing food
into the south from the Ugandan border town of Nimule were ambushed…The drivers were bound by ropes to their
steering wheels, and then grenades were lobbed at the trucks. This put a virtual halt to the World Food Program’s
overland relief operation. Only 600 of the 90,000 tons had been delivered.” [18]
In November 2003 the Government accused rebels in Darfur of killing two of its relief workers and abducting three
others in an attack on an aid convoy. Humanitarian Aid Commissioner Sulaf Eddin Salih said his government is
worried about the “continued” rebel attacks which he said “threaten the humanitarian operations and result in losing
human lives and worsening the humanitarian situation”. He appealed to the international community to intervene to
halt and denounce the “repeated” armed operations on the humanitarian assistance convoys. [19]
Put quite simply, insecurity severely curtails humanitarian aid access. In the words of a UN humanitarian relief
spokesman: “You can’t give aid when there are bullets flying.” [20] In January 2004, for example, UN media sources
reported that “about 85 percent of the 900,000 war-affected people in Darfur…are inaccessible to humanitarian
aid…mainly because of insecurity.” [21] In December 2003, the UN quoted the Government as saying “The problem is
in areas controlled by the SLM. Our experience has made us hesitant to send relief to areas under the SLM because
of kidnapping and attacks on trucks.” [22] In October 2003, in the wake of the above-mentioned attacks, the United
States government asked the Sudanese government for help with security and access. [23] One month later, rebel
gunmen killed two other relief workers and abducted three others. [24] Rebels have also kidnapped other relief workers.
In a further example of interference with humanitarian work, JEM gunmen admitted abducting five aid workers
working for the Swiss humanitarian group Medair. [25]
On 11 February 2004, JEM declared its intention to close down every road within Darfur. It would have been aware
of the devastating consequences this would have on the ability of the government and aid agencies (national and
international) to provide emergency assistance to those communities suffering in Darfur. This was at precisely the
same time, in February 2004, as the United Nations high commissioner for refugees warned of a humanitarian
catastrophe in Darfur. Médecins Sans Frontières had also warned that there was not enough food or water in the
desert region. [26]
In February 2004, the state minister at the Ministry for Humanitarian Affairs, Mohammed Youssef Moussa,
commented on an attack on Save the Children: “It is true that (the rebels) have started causing damage and today, in
particular, they planted a land mine near the town of Ambro that went off, wounding a lorry driver and his assistant.
The lorry was carrying medical supplies and belonged to Save the Children Fund-UK. So if this is what they are
talking about, then they are...abandoning all humanitarian principles.”
[27]
In early January 2004 the Sudanese government said its troops were trying to secure deliveries of humanitarian aid to
people caught up in the Darfur conflict. The ministry of humanitarian affairs said a government delegation had
completed a nine-day tour of West and South Darfur states during which it had examined the obstacles hindering the
delivery of assistance to parts of the region. The ministry stated that the obstacles included insecurity and instability.
The delegation said the government armed forces “are working to tighten their grip on the situation” which would
ease the delivery of relief supplies to some areas. The delegation instructed the offices of the Humanitarian Aid
Commission (HAC) in Darfur to speed up distribution of relief supplies. [28]
On 10 February 2004, the United Nations said that aid access had improved within Darfur. The UN spokesman for
the humanitarian coordinator for Sudan, Ben Parker, stated: “There are signs and indications that we will be able to
reach more places in the coming weeks and the government is assuring us that the access situation will improve”.
The government had told aid agencies that it had opened 10 new corridors in Darfur for relief convoys to move
through. [29] The UN Emergency Relief Coordinator, Jan Egeland, described the agreement with the Sudanese
government to provide improved aid access to Darfur as a breakthrough. [30] As part of the UN-government agreement,
on 18 February 2004, the UN announced that a 13-person UN logistical team arrived in Darfur to assess
humanitarian needs in the area. The team would assess aid requirements in the cities of Nyala, al-Geneina and al-
Fasher as UN agencies work to deliver and pre-position food, water and medical supplies for around 250,000
displaced people. [31]
Rebel attacks on relief convoys continued. A senior UN official in Sudan stated in February 2004 that rebels have
made it too dangerous to take aid into parts of Darfur. Aid convoys were still being attacked by armed groups. The
spokesman also cited the danger of landmines.” [32] In March 2004, the Sudanese government held rebels responsible
for blocking deliveries of humanitarian aid in Darfur. Deputy Foreign Minister al-Tigani Salih Fidhail said: “The
armed groups constitute the main obstacle to the delivery of relief in Darfur.” He called on the international
community to hold the rebels “fully responsible”. [33]
A high-level UN humanitarian assessment mission, under the leadership of World Food Programme Executive
Director James Morris, visited Darfur in late April 2004. Rebel attacks on aid workers continued. At the same time
the SLA attacked a humanitarian convoy, killing a traditional leader of the Zaghawa, Abdel Rahman Mohammain, who
was leading it. [34] The International Crisis Group noted continuing rebel obstruction in May 2004: “The SLA issued several
statements in the first half of May to the effect that it will refuse to allow into areas it controls any humanitarian relief that
originates in government-controlled areas - where most UN and international NGOs are based.” [35]
In early June 2004, Associated Press reported the abduction by rebels of 16 aid workers. Those kidnapped worked
for the International Rescue Committee, Save the Children UK, the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian
Affairs (OCHA), United Nation’s World Food Program, UNICEF, the Norwegian Refugee Council, ECHO, the
Humanitarian Aid Office of the European Commission, and Sudan’s Humanitarian Aid Commission. They were
stopped while were conducting assessments to prepare the way for delivery of relief assistance for displaced people
in the vicinity of Al Hilief in North Darfur despite driving vehicles clearly bearing the UN insignia. [36] They were
eventually released by the rebels. The UN Emergency Relief Coordinator, Jan Egeland, condemned the detention and
delayed release of the 16 aid workers as “totally unacceptable” and “contradicts solemn promises” made by the
SLA. Egeland said that “Too much time has already been lost in this race against the clock to save more than a
million lives threatened by indiscriminate violence, starvation and disease.” The UN stated that “[t]he incident not only threatened the safety and security of humanitarian workers, but has interrupted and delayed aid to desperately
needy civilians in Darfur.” [37]
On 8 June 2004, Agence France Presse reported that rebels had seized nine trucks loaded with relief items, medicines
and tents on the road between Nyala and al-Fasher. The rebels abducted four of the drivers and beat a fifth one. [38]
Later that month, rebels attacked a humanitarian relief convoy in Darfur, stealing 57 tons of UN food aid. Ibrahim
Hamid, the minister of humanitarian affairs, said: “These types of rebel action are the most serious threat to the
humanitarian and security situation.” [39]
In the first week of July 2004, the SLA attacked 26 aid workers, working for Save the Children UK, delivering
emergency assistance in northern Darfur. They also stole six vehicles and a large amount of cash. On 13 July, the
British government publicly urged Sudanese rebels to return the stolen vehicles. [40] There were a number of systematic
rebel attacks on aid workers in August 2004. The African Union confirmed that, on 22 August, SLA forces had
abducted humanitarian affairs workers on their way to a meeting in the Abgaragil area, and that on 23 August rebels
had abducted medical aid workers engaged in an inoculation campaign in Kutum. [41] At the end of August 2004,
Darfur rebels abducted six aid workers in north Darfur. Three were from the World Food Programme and three from
the Sudanese Red Crescent. WFP condemned the targeting of humanitarian workers. WFP Senior Deputy Executive
Director Jean-Jacques Graisse said that WFP was “delighted that our people, as well as those working for the
Sudanese Red Crescent, have been freed unharmed. This is not, however, the first time that humanitarian workers
have been targeted in Darfur. At a time when all agencies are battling the rainy season, poor infrastructure and an
unpredictable security environment to deliver desperately needed humanitarian assistance, this kind of incident can
only further worsen the plight of the needy in Darfur. We call upon all armed groups in the region to stop targeting
those involved in humanitarian work and allow them to do their duty without fear of intimidation. Any continuation
or escalation of incidents such as the one just resolved is likely to have far-reaching consequences for the relief
operation.” [42] On 31 August 2004, JEM gunmen detained 22 Sudanese health workers near Nyala in south Darfur. [43]
In late August, the United Nations humanitarian coordinator for Sudan, Manuel Aranda da Silva, stated that he was
encouraged by Sudan’s actions to improve the humanitarian situation in Darfur. [44]
In October 2004, the Sudanese government’s chief negotiator at Abuja, Dr Magzoub al-Khalifa, warned that the
rebels were seeking to worsen affairs in Darfur: “They need to stimulate all these governments and all these
organizations on their side by making the situation worse on the ground.” [45] October also saw rebel threats to kill aid
workers. [46] A SLA landmine killed two Save the Children Fund workers in Darfur. Two other Save the Children
workers, one British and one Sudanese, were killed in October by a landmine laid by SLA rebels. [47] The United
Nations special envoy to Sudan Jan Pronk unambiguously confirmed rebel involvement in these deaths: “It was the
rebels who are responsible for attacking relief workers and convoys, they are responsible for…landmines which
killed two relief workers.” [48]
That same month, the United Nations reported that “UN spokesman Fred Eckhard said in New York that the
operations of humanitarian agencies in North Darfur State have become limited because some roads remain closed to
them. Other areas have become dangerous for transporting aid supplies. Last Saturday, forces from the rebel Sudan
Liberation Army (SLA) hijacked seven commercial trucks on a road about 120 kilometres east of the state capital El
Fasher.” [49] A spokeswoman for the UN Advance Mission in Sudan (UNAMIS) stated that “[t]he repeated ceasefire
violations of the past month have had a very serious impact on the UN’s ability to deliver humanitarian assistance to
affected populations.” [50]
In mid-November 2004, the United Nations said that nearly 200,000 needy people, especially in the mountainous
Jebel Marra area in central Darfur and the northern part of North Darfur, had been cut off from relief aid because of
escalating violence. The German press agency reported: “The U.N. said tension in the region had risen as rebel
groups, in particular the Sudan Liberation Army (SLA), had increased their operations in an apparent attempt to
claim more territory.” The Humanitarian Coordinator for Sudan, Manuel Aranda da Silva, said an estimated 150,000
people have been driven from their homes due to the escalating violence during the past month. The UN also
reported several attacks on buses and aid convoys around Darfur. Travellers had been abducted and even killed and
vehicles looted by the attackers. [51] By the end of November 2004, The New York Times was reporting that the
rebels had been “sharply ratcheting up attacks” which in turn was preventing relief work. [52]
In November 2004 the rebels were accused of attacking a joint WHO/Ministry of Health medical team. One doctor
was killed and four other health workers were injured. The team was also robbed. [53] In the same month both the
Dublin-based GOAL aid agency and the Spanish branch of Médecins Sans Frontières were forced to withdraw their
staff from the Jebel Marra area in central Darfur after “repeated” rebel acts of aggression targeting the humanitarian
personnel and the relief supplies intended for people in need. [54] Both MSF and GOAL complained that rebels had
attacked their vehicles. [55] On 27 November 2004, The New York Times revealed the degree of rebel obstruction of
aid delivery and aid workers: “On the ground, many aid workers, too fearful of giving their names for fear of
jeopardizing their work, say that rebel officials have made unreasonable demands on aid groups operating in their
territory, at one point insisting on a certain number of expatriates to accompany Sudanese staff, whom rebels distrust
as potential government spies. Aid workers have also been detained in rebel territory in recent months.” [56]
Amnesty International noted a similar pattern of rebel activity: “over the past two months, a number of World Food
Program commercial trucks have been attacked in South Darfur.” [57] It also noted that: “After Sudan Liberation Army
forces reportedly hijacked seven commercial trucks east of al-Fasher on 23 October, the road between al-Fasher and
Um Kedada in North Darfur was closed and has only just been re-opened. Because of heavy fighting in the area, the
road between al-Fasher and Kutum remains a no-go zone.”
In early December, The Christian Science Monitor confirmed the results of rebel action: “[R]ecently they’ve
stepped up attacks and have even looted international aid convoys. The violence adds to the instability – and to aid
groups’ growing inability to help the displaced millions.” [58] Two Save the Children aid workers, members of a mobile
medical clinic, were murdered by rebels on 12 December 2004. They were deliberately shot dead in an attack on an
aid convoy. The director of Save the Children’s international operations said: “We deplore this brutal killing of
humanitarian workers in Darfur.” The charity said its vehicles were clearly marked as belonging to Save the
Children. [59] The African Union and United Nations confirmed the SLA’s responsibility for the deaths of the aid
workers. In addition to the murdered aid workers, one other worker was injured and three are missing. African Union
officer Nigerian Major-General Festus Okonkwo stated: “SLA was involved in the attack as two Land Rovers
belonging to Save the Children (UK) were recovered from [the] SLA camp in Jurof.” [60] Rebel involvement in the
murders was established by the UN. [61] In mid-December the United Nations suspended aid operations in South
Darfur in December in the wake of these murders. [62] The Guardian reported that an aid worker was shot on the same
road in the summer but survived.
The UN Envoy to Sudan, Jan Pronk, said of the rebel attacks and interference with aid deliveries: “They have to stop.
Otherwise they are blocking access to the very people they say they are protecting.” [63] In December 2004, Sudan’s
Minister for Humanitarian Affairs, Mohamed Yusif Abdallah, made the obvious point that “[w]here the rebels create
insecurity, it is not the government denying access.” [64] The United Nations Darfur Humanitarian Profile released in
December 2004 has stated, for example, that: “Despite prevailing insecurity in the three Darfur States, 79% of Darfur conflict affected population is currently accessible to UN humanitarian workers. Most of the underserved areas
remain rebel-held, many of which have not been accessible to UN agencies because of a series of security incidents
and a delay in obtaining SLA agreement and understanding of humanitarian rules and principles laid out in
agreements.” [65] [emphasis added] The rebels are endangering the lives of hundreds of thousands of civilians already
malnourished and badly affected by the conflict in Darfur.
On 22 December 2004, The New York Times has also reported that: “The chaotic situation in Darfur has hampered
the work of agencies trying to reach the estimated 2.3 million people who rely on aid to survive. Aid organizations in
the region say rebels have been attacking convoys carrying aid and goods along the road between Nyala and El
Fasher, where two Save the Children UK workers were killed recently.” [66] Ongoing rebel attacks, particularly that on
the market town of Ghubaysh on 27 December, had disastrous effects on the delivery of food aid to affected
communities. The United Nations noted: “This has a particular impact on WFP’s provision of life-saving food aid, as
it must rely heavily on road deliveries to support its Darfur humanitarian operation.” [67] A World Food Programme
spokeswoman said: “The attacks followed a week of insecurity in Darfur and this has caused difficulties, in terms of
providing assistance. It will delay urgently required food for 260,000 people in South Darfur and the eastern parts of
West Darfur.” [68] UNAMIS noted that the rebel attack on Ghubaysh was “the second carried out by the rebels since 19
December, when the Sudanese government agreed to an immediate cessation of hostilities”.
The rebels’ murder of aid workers has had the desired effect – the intensification of the humanitarian crisis in Darfur
with the ultimate aim of forcing some sort of military intervention. It has gone hand-in-hand with the SLA’s
deliberate breaking of ceasefire agreements with attacks in northern Darfur. This precipitated the current
humanitarian crisis in Darfur. Associated Press reported that: “The United Nations has condemned a rebel attack in
Darfur province, saying it violates a cease-fire agreement and jeopardises the lives of tens of thousands of people
who will not receive aid because of the fighting.” [69] The international community has roundly condemned these rebel
actions. [70] These systematic rebel attacks have placed hundreds of thousands of war-affected communities in danger
of starvation. The Director of Save the Children UK, Mike Aaronson, stated that: “We are devastated that we are
unable to continue to offer health care, nutritional support, child protection and education to the approximately
250,000 children and family members served by our current programs. However, we just cannot continue to expose
our staff to the unacceptable risks they face as they go about their humanitarian duties in Darfur.” [71]
Erwin Van Der Borght, deputy director of Amnesty International’s Africa programme, has also noted the effect of
rebel attacks: “Attacks knowingly and intentionally directed against personnel involved in humanitarian assistance in
armed conflict may constitute war crimes. Insecurity within Darfur hinders movement to whole districts, so that
food, medicine and other non-food items can not be brought in. This increases enormously the sufferings of an
already vulnerable population.” Amnesty International noted that “After such attacks, the district or road is likely to
be declared a no-go area for international humanitarian staff for several days” and pointed out that it stopped aid
reaching “thousands” of displaced people. [72] On 31 December 2004, The Daily Telegraph reported on SLA attacks
in December had “forced the United Nations to suspend supply convoys into Darfur”: “The SLA attacks seemed to
be designed to isolate Darfur. The rebels struck police stations in the town of Ghibaish and al-Majrour in the
neighbouring province of West Kordofan, killing 99 people. The ensuing battle closed Darfur’s main communication
artery.” [73]
In his January 2005 report on Darfur, the United Nations Secretary-General reported on what he termed a “new
trend” in the pattern of attacks on, and harassment of, international aid workers: “While previous incidents have only
been aimed at looting supplies and goods, December has seen acts of murder and vicious assaults on staff, forcing
some agencies to leave Darfur.” [74] Aid access continues to be vital. Rebel intransigence continues to put the very
people for whom they claim to be fighting at grave risk. The international community must act and act decisively.
Footnotes
|
 |
|
